Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 1:45 AM
Mon Nov 9
19 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us: tips@kotaku.com
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
Email | AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
Email | AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
Email | AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/07/09
:3 #kotakuoriginals
11/07/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
It's like if a 15 year today told you. NES wasn't that big from what I've seen. It's easy to say that when you weren't actually there. #atari2600
11/05/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
11/01/09
If I wanted articles about porn stars, I'd go to Fleshbot.
11/01/09
Like it or not, regardless of their noteriety or profession, it is a gaming-related article.
That, and I need not remind the advent of selecting and choosing which articles one elects to read. I'd like to think that Kotaku has more intelligence than to read and then quip about the article they disapprove of right off the bat.
It is actually an insult to intelligence to see those who read the article which they know already displeases them for whatever trivial prejudiced reason and suit their quip with ancillary undertones.
No, sir. He does NOT have a valid point for the following reasons:
1. It is a gaming-related article.
2. It features an interview with a gamer (particularly a not-so-featured type of gamer, at that.)
3. It is a niche topic that can easily be passed by with the scroll wheel of the mouse if one automatically assumes that they will be displeased upon clicking on the story header.
For these reasons stated, his/her quibble is unfounded and unjustified. #kotakuoriginals
11/03/09
Any idea where I can get some?
Also, the unintelligent portion of my reply: Nu-uh yourrr rong!
Or something. #kotakuoriginals
11/03/09
I'M RIGHT AND YOU KNOW IT!
Contemplating: I should start writing books with cliche titles like that. That's for another topic on another, more relevant Gawker site, however...
As for your new inquiry:
www.ravenalexis.com
AND
www.ravensplayhouse.com
You are more than welcome to peruse them for... *ahem* " recreation research purposes" for "works cited". Remember to use the revised MLA format when you are finished, though.
: ) #kotakuoriginals
11/04/09
Thanks for the heads up.
Also, Raven has some tig ol' bitties on her huh?
[EDIT] Check out my user handle. :)
11/04/09
Thanks for the support!
Personally, I do not care if people agree with me or not. That is not the point of the forum. At the same token, I do not expect an arbitrary and capricious series of administrative action to be taken against me when I stand my ground and do so within the guidelines.
Failure to maintain administrative action within the guidelines established and even further failure of maintaining clear and concise provision within those guidelines is not my problem. Apparently, other Gawker editors from other sites agree with me on this. You'll know what I mean if you visit other sites with my postings there.
But I will also note that I let no disparate treatment on me, trivial or not, go unnoticed, thus my new handle and approach towards Kotaku. It might be abrasive, but it is far less than my opponents have displayed against me and my stance on life and controversial subjects.
Bottom line on the matter - A writer, editor or otherwise moderator would be wise to check their bias at the door before making their administrative assertions; especially if they are going to be writing an op-ed on a controversial topic. It is disingeniune of me to stifle my commentary when it can be disagreed upon, but within the tenets of the guidelines written.
At the same time, Mr. Good would be even wiser to remember that even with the ability to "wipe out" his own commentary, that "there are no secrets. It doesn't show any longer on here, but it doesn't mean I know. Thus, my further lack of respect for him at this time.
The boundaries of what is and isn't fair and reasonable within a forum had been breached, and I will not back away from it, be it a star given or removed, or a banhammer wielded my way. Because as worthwhile as posting on this Gawker Media blog once were, it were cheapened by one writer and his lack of administrative ethics.
That inadvertently also cheapened the value of the star to me. On this Gawker page, anyway.
Back on topic - Yes, they are lovely, aren't they? Personally, I like her looks (and what I've read about her so far) since she reminds me of a midwestern girl, which to me is the best kind of American Girl you can find! #kotakuoriginals
11/05/09
My idea in life is: Respect everyone you meet, unless they give you a reason not to. Even then, you can still continue to give the person in question the upmost respect, although they might not do the same to you and others.
That being said, I am literally unable to be angry with Mr. Good. But, I do disapprove of the way he acted toward you voicing your opinion, carefully considering your previous post of course. I haven't seen the disputed posts in question, so I will not make a final stance.
I can relate to what you are saying; I have also been the personally alleged victim of the barring of freedom of speech.
So if you could send me the link to these posts, it would be very appreciated.
Raven is a very pretty woman. I haven't yet checked out those websites, but I will very soon.
(I had a crush on Magibon for countless months. Until the faithful day a Kotaku commenter sent me this heart-breaking link: [i90.photobucket.com]) #kotakuoriginals
11/05/09
Hey Rayne,
I have a feeling that QUITE A BIT were erased there, along with the writer in question's response, which were quickly deleted by that same person at roughly 10:33PM that evening. Apparently, that person is astute enough to realize that while I am not out to seek appeal (I'm not), that I would make a side-debate on the implied moral and ethical duties that come from being a writer/editor on a blog that aims for input. The bias alone has become a side issue, but when a person also shows what is unfair and unreasonable and demonstrates by disparate means among the interacting readership, the credibility of the staff's integrity is at stake. While one might argue that this is a blogsite, it is a commercial blogsite that practices under tenets similar to that of a credible press entity.
Whether I am mad or not at Owen is trivial. Actually, despite my profile's retort, I am not, but I can also demote my respect for him as a professional. To be honest, I pity him; knowing that any possible chance he'd have had with a 21st century media magnate could be jeopardized by a show of unprofessionalism within journalistic actions. I know that abrasiveness is embraced as expressionism, and that stifling out of bias ejects a person from an academic credible standard.
I know it from witnessing it in real life.
I would'nt expect you to be mad with Mr. Good, either. It is unbecoming and unprofessional to go through life with that kind of venom, when what I disapprove of is not the person, but the unbecoming action(s). But I won't kid you that I feel it cowardly to do such a thing, and even more cowardly to not have finished the job. It doesn't/wouldn't kill me if I got banned. It's just a moniker. Nothing more, and my readers (in real life) take more stock in my real reports and articles; negating my need to be read/scene/heard/etc.
Like I've said elsewhere, whether I am read and interacted with here, or in my real life secondary profession, a part-time "writer" cannot and will not stifle me everywhere. : )
As for the topic, I believe that with this and other topics, there is not just the absolutes. You can disapprove not condone of a person's lifestyle and still "break bread" with them. You can also hold civil discourse with any topic, no matter how impassioned. But when one debater or another aims for "logical fallacies", which also include a militant approach to one's own prose, they (nor anyone) should not be surprised if the opponent refuse to be "brow beaten", especially if they follow the tenets of logical speaking/writing.
The funny thing about it is that with a logical, more reasonable approach, both sides could have had a really good discussion that maps out all of the gradients.
C'est la vie, I suppose? #kotakuoriginals
11/06/09
11/07/09
It is not to say that my real life persona hadn't actually already done so, Rayne. : )
While I reflect my Soldier heritage and defense advisory status within my moniker, it is just a facet of who I am. While I am not yet ready to unshroud my full identity, there are three people within the Gawker Media Group that actually do know who I am, and two more who have a pretty good idea of most/all that I do.
Writing (and being published) is actually one of them. The topic isn't always resorted to my defense advisory position either, but might explain in further detail on how and why I am able to afford some of the toys and amenities that I have mentioned on here in the past. (Think about it: Even a Colonel can't afford my tastes with their salary.)
Still, more important than the publishing is the honest dialogue, which is where the lectern within an academic setting comes in. When hotbed topics become too "politically correct", no amount of nicety will break way for the candor... That hard truth that people tend to be psychosomatically fearful of, yet is necessary to engage if anyone is to get to the bottom of a compromise. That doesn't mean shout ad hominems, but rather to engage within the social discourse and compare and contrast; while respecting the societal order to uphold the standards needed to keep us grounded collectively. #kotakuoriginals
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
11/01/09
10/31/09
For contrast, the porn free front page view count is currently at 342,320 (Crecente's Alexis article and this one referring to it not counted). This still includes "sexy" articles such as the ones on Milla Jovovich and Bayonetta. At 38 articles, the porn free front page article view average is 9,008.421. Thus, writing about a porn star's PC case garnered 12.34 times the number of views as the average, topical article. #kotakuoriginals
10/31/09
hehehe, yeah.. busted Kotaku will do that to a man..
ooew look, a wall. #kotakuoriginals
10/31/09
10/31/09
5. Search for PORN.
4. Upload PORN.
3. Download PORN.
2. Watch PORN.
1. PORN. #kotakuoriginals
10/31/09
10/31/09
More.
Porn.
Articles. #kotakuoriginals
10/31/09
10/31/09
11/01/09
10/31/09
I also hate admitting that I visited to that article about 8 or 9 times. (For the comments!) #kotakuoriginals
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
*gloveslap* #kotakuoriginals
10/24/09
So thought we'd make our own;
Commenter made Sunday Comics #original
10/24/09
@deanbmmv: Showmeyomoves! told me I should post mine here, but I really thought we were making our own. :( #original
10/24/09
10/24/09
10/24/09
10/24/09
Seriously Crecente, if you had tits I'd do ya. You're like a modern day pirate with that mustache.
10/24/09
Years later, I met my dad's two brothers, my real uncles. They looked and acted just like my dad. I remember thinking how grandpa was a much better uncle than those two bozos.
R.I.P. Uncle Grandpa. #original
10/24/09
R.I.P. Uncle cat. #original
10/24/09
But now he's an asshole and im forced to drink crappy chocolate milk.
R.I.P Quik
10/24/09